Forum:Manual of Style
With the creation of the Category:Relationships articles, and the substantial amount of other forms of articles on the wiki, and soon to be added to the wiki, I think we need a Manual of Style to keep the pages in order. For example: notice the difference of the headings in Tula and say Robin. Headings difference also in Fireworks and Bereft. You might also notice on substantially large character articles (usually characters in Young Justice) with different sized images riddled throughout the article. Due to these reasons, I believe the Manual of Style should be formed. Also I have successfully requested Spotlight, so if more users start editing on the wiki, I feel there should be a strong source of guidelines for them to edit by. Supermorff and myself have undone countless edits of people adding either unconfirmed information, or lately irrelevant images in the relationship pages. So can we think about this please? [[User:Rassilon of Old|'Rassilon of Old']] (Talk - TTFF - Teru) 07:14, March 31, 2011 (UTC) :Well, the unsourced information thing already has a policy, and it won't be covered by a Manual of Style. I'm okay with the idea of making one, as long as it's not overly restrictive. It should be based on the good practice around the wiki, rather than trying to impose something foreign onto the wiki. We've built up a good catalogue of articles, so we can now probably see what works and what doesn't - maybe less so for Relationship articles, since those are a new addition. Anyway, I'm willing to try and sort something out. -- Supermorff 18:35, March 31, 2011 (UTC) ::With relationship pages I was more looking to make the guidelines on what is appropriate on the pages, like images which only feature one character for example, which you, and myself have been removing. And for articles, it is image placing, headers, where the official art should go, what order the headings are in, that kind of stuff. I agree, it should not be restrictive, but we just need to set a set of guidlines for users, who arn't completely sure. [[User:Rassilon of Old|'Rassilon of Old']] (Talk - TTFF - Teru) 19:22, March 31, 2011 (UTC) :::Okay, let's hammer something out. Do you want to write up a draft or do you want us to sort out what we're going to write first? -- Supermorff 19:53, March 31, 2011 (UTC) ::I'll throough a draft together for the episode pages at least, which will be pretty straight forward. Then we can talk about whether to stik with the current layout of the character articles. Cause I thnk that alll official artwork should be put in the Production Hisory, or in the Appearences section, which ever the article has, and whichever comes first. Also in the Manual of Style we could include guidelines for an infobox image. I'd also like to know Thailog's opinion on this, and also get feedback from the entire community, so ocne we get started we may need to make a blog post, since the community pays a lot of attention to blogs. Thoughts? [[User:Rassilon of Old|'Rassilon of Old']] (Talk - TTFF - Teru) 23:27, March 31, 2011 (UTC) From the DCAU Wiki: # The image should be of the highest quality available. DVD screen-captures are preferred, with television recordings and other formats being secondary. In the case of duplicate images, the highest quality image is kept. ##Compression artifacts or aliasing problems are not a reason to substitute a DVD capture with a different shot, but they are grounds to replace it with the same shot without such flaws. # The image should be an accurate, dignifying representation of the character. ## Images should not include crude or vulgar moments. These moments are rare, but a handful do exist and should be avoided unless addressing a specific point. Examples include "private parts" featured prominently in an image, panty or codpiece shots, etc. # The infobox image should depict the character's most recognizable likeness (Speedy vs. Red Arrow, for example), unless consensus dictates otherwise. # The character in the infobox should be standing still, which includes all kind of absence of movement (characters should not be talking). # If an article contains three images or more (including the infobox), an image from the character's waist up is sufficient for the infobox. At least one of the images in the article should depict the character's full body, or the images as a group should show enough angles to give a full impression of the character. An article with two or fewer images should have a full body shot, or as close to one as possible, in the infobox. Extreme facial closeups should be avoided. I think they are pretty broad and could apply anywhere. Voice your opinion. ― Thailog 13:33, April 1, 2011 (UTC) :Lose the first point, since no DVDs exist of this show yet. Lose the sub-point of the second point, because it is unnecessary given the episodes aired so far. Fourth point is good but should be reworded. The fifth point seems a bit restrictive, but I can't think of anything better off the top of my head. -- Supermorff 13:43, April 1, 2011 (UTC) You could put all redundant and/or unrelated images of the character (or place) under a section at the bottom of the page called "Gallery". That's what I do on my Hellsing Wiki. Sometimes there are very important images but they would clutter up the page if they were all added; this way, they would not get left out. --BlazingStar (My talk) 01:42, April 21, 2011 (UTC) :The purpose of wikis is gathering information, not showcasing images. I'm very much against the vapid use of galleries. ― Thailog 12:21, April 21, 2011 (UTC) ::If the image is not relevant, then it shouldn't be in the article. I have been thinking of modifying the character infobox so it has an 'image gallery' link, like in the episode infobox. [[User:Rassilon of Old|'Rassilon of Old']] (Talk - TTFF - Teru) 15:05, April 21, 2011 (UTC) :::I agree with Thailog. An image shouldn't be added to a character page unless it is useful to illustrate the character in a way no other images can (e.g. in a different costume, or in a different situation, or a full-body shot if the main image is focussed on the upper body or head). For most characters, this will mean only one image is necessary per page. -- Supermorff 17:17, April 21, 2011 (UTC) :::So create a separate page for the Image Gallery? I've seen that before on other wikis; that's a good idea. I agree that in general, only one character image is necessary. --BlazingStar (My talk) 19:31, April 21, 2011 (UTC) ::::No need for that. Image already have categories. The last thing we need is hassling over new pages into which dump images. ― Thailog 19:52, April 21, 2011 (UTC) Could time/locations 'stamps' be idented to stand out more? Anythingspossibleforapossible 01:22, September 14, 2011 (UTC) :I agree. Also, I think they would look good if we made them like they appear on the show. How's this: ― Thailog 20:24, September 15, 2011 (UTC) :That looks great. I've just put a few on Red Arrow. What do you think? 21:40, September 15, 2011 (UTC) ::It sure stands out now. Though the time abbreviations stand out a little too much. I made them smaller. See example above. ― Thailog 21:55, September 15, 2011 (UTC) :::Yeah, that looks better. Now that the timezone tags are included in the template, perhaps the date and location links should be in the template, so there's no need for repetitive linking. Thoughts? 22:28, September 15, 2011 (UTC) ::::I left that out because not every location and date are linkable, and there's also the issue of not linking repeated words in close proximity. See the first two time stamps in Speedy: same date but only the first gets linked. ― Thailog 23:05, September 15, 2011 (UTC) :::Another thing for the MoS. Official art - for example, character promos, and their location on articles. I personally think and prefer that the official art be located in Appearances or Trivia sections, as the actual content of the article (characteristics, history, etc.) should have screenshots from the episodes, depicting the respective character's characteristics and history, not a piece of promotional art. I agree, that it is the only image we have which has the character's full body pictured, but since it is not necesarily 'canon', it should not be in the history or chracteristics section of content of an article. Whad'ya think? 22:48, September 15, 2011 (UTC) ::::I agree. That or completely leave it out. ― Thailog 23:05, September 15, 2011 (UTC) :::::Thanks for the support and turning it into something even better. :) -- Anythingspossibleforapossible 00:08, September 16, 2011 (UTC) ::::::It was something I had wanted to do for sometime. You gave me the right nudge. I'm still not sure about the indentation. Is it too much now? ― Thailog 11:43, September 16, 2011 (UTC) :::::::It could be brought in a little closer. I also think there could be little breathing space between the end of one paragraph and the next one with the stamp begins so it's easier tell which scene is supposed to have the stamp. Although it's pretty obvious to understand even if you've never been here before, it does look a bit squashed together if you know what I mean. -- Anythingspossibleforapossible 13:02, September 16, 2011 (UTC) I dunno about reducing the indent, I quite like it. As for the recognition of where the stamp is, I have added a tag to space it down a little bit, and if you look at Red Arrow, you can see how significantly it seperates each paragraph/time zone. I don't mind the look of it, what about the rest of you? 01:26, September 17, 2011 (UTC) ::The is definitely an improvement, and makes the identation look a lot better. -- Anythingspossibleforapossible 03:31, September 17, 2011 (UTC) :::It was too much. I edited the code to create a more subtle space on top and on bottom. ― Thailog 12:21, September 17, 2011 (UTC)